House Public Safety and Security Policy and Finance Committee 3/13/18

House Public Safety and Security Policy and Finance Committee 3/13/18


>>[GAVEL]>>CHAIR JOHNSON: I CALL THE PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY POLICY FINANCE COMMITTEE TO ORDER. WE WILL START WITH THE ROLLCALL.>>STAFF: JOHNSON HERE; LOHMER HERE; HILSTROM HERE; TRENTON HERE; CONSIDINE; HERE; DEHN; HERE FRANKE; HERE ROSSELL GROSSELL; HERE HOWE; HERE; LUCERO; HERE NEWBERGER; HERE; UGLEM; HERE PINTO; HERE UGLEM; HERE WARD; HERE ZERWAS HERE.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE PINTO HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE MINUTES?>>REPRESENTATIVE PINTO: MR. CHAIR I HAVE AND I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES. BEECHER JOHNSON ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY; AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES.] OPPOSED; NAY. THEY ARE APPROVED.>>[GAVEL]>>REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON:>>CHAIR JOHNSON: FIRST OFF WERE GOING TO START WITH HOUSE FILE 3157. REPRESENTATIVE–WE MOVED TO REFER TO THE GENERAL REGISTER HOUSE FILE 3157. REPRESENTATIVE TRENT GREEN YOU CAN PROCEED.>>REPRESENTATIVE GREEN: THANK YOU MR. JAPAN I BELIEVE THERE’S A DE – AMENDMENT.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THE CHAIRMAN WILL MOVE DE – ONE TO GET IT IN THE AUTHORS THE WAY THE AUTHOR INTENDS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY; AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES.] OPPOSED; NAY. MOTION IS APPROVED. REPRESENTATIVE DEAN GO HEAD.>>REPRESENTATIVE GREEN: I APPRECIATE THE INPUT I HAVE THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE. I THINK WE’VE TRIED TO ANSWER AS MANY OF THE CONCERNS AS WE COULD. THROUGH THE FOLKS THAT TESTIFIED THE BILL IS BEFORE YOU. IT’S PRETTY SIMPLE BILL. IT HAS ALL CHANGED A LOT. THERE’S SOME TECHNICAL CHANGES AND A FEW SAFEGUARDS PUT IN A. I JUST IN FOR QUESTIONS.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: FIRST TESTIFIER IS GOING TO BE RON ELWOOD. STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND PROCEED WITH YOUR TESTIMONY.>>TESTIFIER: MY NAME IS>>REPRESENTATIVE LAWYERS TO ANSWER ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS. CHAD WILSON FOR MY LEFT. AND JUSTIN PAGE BEHIND ME. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR ALLOWING US TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS HEARING. FIRST OFF; I REALLY WANT TO THANK REPRESENTATIVE GREENE FOR MAKING THE CHANGES AND FOUR INDULGING ME COME INTO HIS OFFICE. I’M NOT SURE THAT OPEN DOOR POLICY WAS GOING TO BE REMAIN ANYMORE IF I GO ONE MORE TIME BUT I DO APPRECIATE HIS INDULGENCE. I DO WANT TO SAY THAT THE NEW DEFINITIONS OF THEIR LINE 1.4-1.8 DRAMATICALLY STRENGTHEN THE BILL. AND REALLY TIGHTEN IT TO THE POINT WHERE AS WE MENTIONED BEFORE THIS DOES ELIMINATE THE SERVICE PONY OR THE SERVICE HORSE ISSUE BECAUSE UNDER THE DEFINITION THAT YOU HAVE HERE REFERRING TO THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATION IT ONLY DEALS WITH A DOG. I THINK IT’S A SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL TIGHTENING RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH I THINK WOULD AGAIN IMPROVE AND STRENGTHEN THIS BILL AND LET ME SAY BEFORE I EVEN PERCEIVE THAT WE REALLY APPRECIATE REPRESENTATIVE BREEN BRING THE BILL FOR. WE OF COURSE; AGREE WITH HIM AND ALL THE PROPONENTS THAT MISREPRESENTING SERVICE ANIMALS IS AN EGREGIOUS ACT IT SHOULD BE CONDEMNED. IT SHOULD BE ADDRESSED. WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW IT. THAT SOMETHING THAT WE–I CAN IMAGINE ANYBODY ACTUALLY DOING IT BUT CLEARLY; THE DO. SO WE ARE ON THAT SCORE CERTAINLY ON THE SAME SIDE. SO; WE WOULD SUGGEST THAT LINE 1.10; THE WORD; MISREPRESENT; IS THERE. BUT THERE IS REALLY NO DEFINITION OF WHAT MISREPRESENTATION IS. I THINK THE BILL WOULD BE IMPROVED IF WE COULD DESCRIBE AND DEFINE WHAT MISREPRESENTATION IS. IN OTHER STATES THE LAW SAYS THAT MISREPRESENTATION IS BRINGING IN AN ANIMAL THAT IS NOT A SERVICE ANIMAL OR THAT A PERSON THAT DOESN’T HAVE A DISABILITY WOULD BE MISREPRESENTING BY BRINGING IN AN ANIMAL. I THINK THE BILL COULD BE STRENGTHENED IF WE ACTUALLY DEF INE WHAT MISREPRESENTATION IS. SECOND OF ALL; BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOW REPRESENTATIVE TRAN GREEN AS REFERENCE THE CODE OF REGULATIONS THAT IT’S ONLY A DOG I DO THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO PROVIDE A SENTENCE IN THERE THAT PERMITS A STORE OWNER TO EXCLUDE ANY ANIMAL THAT IS NOT A DOG. THAT’S REALLY CLEAR. THAT WOULD STRENGTHEN THE HAND; I THINK AMOUNT OF THE PROPRIETORS AND ALLOW FOLKS TO DECIDE IF YOU’RE NOT A DOG YOU CANNOT BE IN HERE UNDER THE LAW. THIRD; WE WOULD SUGGEST THAT UNDER THE FEDERAL LAW EVEN IF IT IS A SERVICE ANIMAL THAT SERVICE ANIMAL IS EITHER NOT IN CONTROL OF THE HANDLER WERE NOT HOUSED BROKEN WHICH IS RARE; BUT IT DOES HAPPEN; UNDER THE FEDERAL LAW; YOU CAN KICK THAT PERSON AND DOG OUT EVEN IF IT’S A SERVICE ANIMAL AND ARE EITHER NOT HOUSEBROKEN WHERE THEY ARE UNRULY. WE WOULD SUGGEST THAT ADDING THAT WOULD ALSO STRENGTHEN THE HANDS OF THE BUSINESS OWNERS TO BE ABLE TO EXCLUDE UNRULY ANIMALS REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY OR NOT SERVICE ANIMALS. THE OTHER THING THAT WE WOULD SUGGEST IS THAT WE WOULD REQUIRE A SUPERVISOR TO BE THE ONE THAT ASKED THE PERSON TO LEAVE . AS OPPOSED TO JUST A REGULAR EMPLOYEE. IT’S VERY DIFFICULT SOMETIMES TO DECIDE WHETHER SOMEBODY IS OR IS NOT A LEGITIMATE -HAS A LEGITIMATE SERVICE ANIMAL AND WE THINK THAT FOR HIM TO GET INTO ANY KIND OF CONFRONTATION AND GROSS’S RESTORE OR ANY PLACE; [INAUDIBLE] SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL AND BE REQUIRED THEY WOULD ASK THE TWO QUESTIONS THAT THEY HAVE TO ASK UNDER FEDERAL LAW; PUT IT IN MINNESOTA LAW. IS THIS A SERVICE ANIMAL? IF SO; WHAT TASK AND WHAT WORKER THEY TRAINED TO PERFORM? THAT WAY A VERY BRIGHT LINE. I THINK IT PROTECTS EVERYBODY. WE WOULD ALSO SUGGEST THAT WE CLARIFY THAT THE STORE OWNER MAY NOT ASK FOR CERTIFICATION BECAU SE THAT IS NOT REQUIRED UNDER THE FEDERAL LAW. I THINK WE SHOULD PUT THAT MINNESOTA LAW. FINALLY; ON THAT SCORE; FOR TRAINING PURPOSES; WE WOULD SUGGEST A CROSS REFERENCE TO SECTION 360 3A .33 WHICH PROVIDES A CIVIL REMEDY FOR A PERSON WHO IS IMPROPERLY EXCLUDED. SO IF YOU ARE-IF YOU HAVE A LEGITIMATE SERVICE DOG AND YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE IN AND YOU ARE EXCLUDED ILLEGALLY THERE IS A REMEDY CIVIL REMEDY UNDER IT THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT AND WE WOULD JUST CONNECT THE DOTS. THEN; FINALLY; THE LAST TIME SUGGESTED THAT MAYBE WE GO DOWN TO TRESPASS ROAD WE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR THE CHAIRS THOUGHTS ON THAT AND SO-THAT HAS JUST GONE OVER LIKE PRETTY MUCH LIKE A LEAD LOON HERE SO WE DECIDED THAT’S PROBABLY NOT A GOOD WAY TO GO. HOWEVER; WE DID SOME MORE INVESTIGATION AND RESEARCH AND FOUND THAT WHILE; YES; THERE ARE ABOUT 20 STATES THAT THINK MISREPRESENTATION A CRIME MAY BE SURPRISED TO KNOW THAT 29 STATES MAKE INTERFERING WITH A SERVICE ANIMAL ILLEGALLY DENYING ACCESS ALSO IN MISDEMEANOR. WE WOULD SUGGEST RESPECTFULLY; THAT WE MAKE IT EVEN. IN FACT; OF THOSE 29 STATES THERE ARE-GEORGIA FOR EXAMPLE MAKES INTERFERING WITH SERVICE ANIMALS A MISDEMEANOR OF A HIGH AND AGGRAVATED NATURE AND OHIO ACTUALLY PROVIDES BEARING DEGREES OF FELONIES IF THE INTERFERENCE WITH THE SERVICE ANIMAL RESULTS IN INJURY OR DEATH OF THE DOG. SO; WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT THAT BE INCLUDED IN THE BILL AND I THINK IF W E DID THESE THINGS; THIS BILL WOULD BE PROBABLY THE STRONGEST IN THE NATION AND WE WOULD THINK WE COULD EASILY SUPPORT THAT. SO THANK YOU. WE’LL BE HAPPY TO STAND FOR QUESTIONS AND AGAIN APPRECIATE REPRESENTATIVE GREENS SUGGESTIONS AND COMMENTS.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE GREEN>>REPRESENTATIVE GREEN: I JUST WANT TO ADDRESS A FEW . IT WAS QUITE LENGTHY BUT THERE WAS SUGGESTED THAT WE MAYBE ASK PEOPLE WITH THEIR DISABILITY IS GOOD WE CAN’T. AND WHILE WE CAN’T DO THAT. YOU CAN ASK THEM WHAT THEIR DISABILITY IS.. SO THAT WOULD NOT BE PERTINENT HERE. THE OTHER THING IS; THE PENALTIES; UNDER CIVIL PENALTIES RIGHT NOW; YOU CAN CHARGED BETWEEN 4000-$20;000 IN CIVIL PENALTIES AND THOSE HAVE BEEN CHARGED IN CASES. I’VE GOT ONE HERE IN ALABAMA. A BUSINESS WAS ORDERED TO PAY $2500 TO AN INDIVIDUAL $27 TO THE US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THERE ARE PENALTIES OUT THERE NOW AND TO ADD MORE TO THE BILL COULD JUST COULD BE REDUNDANT AND I BELIEVE UNNECESSARY. WE HAVE ALREADY ADDRESSED THE TRESPASS LAW AND THE DEFINITION OF THE ANIMAL IS ALREADY IN CODE IT’S A LREADY THERE. WE REFERENCE THAT IN THIS BILL ALREADY. SO I DON’T THINK THOSE THINGS ARE NECESSARY. BY THE WAY; MR. ELWOOD; THE DOOR IS ALWAYS OPEN TO MY OFFICE. I TOLD YOU THAT BEFORE.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: I BELIEVE REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM HAS A QUESTION. GO AHEAD .>>TESTIFIER: JUST TO BE CLEAR THE QUESTIONS THAT WE PROPOSE TO BE ASKED IS NOT THAT ABOUT THE DISABILITY. IT’S WHETHER THE DOG IS A SERVICE DOG AND WHAT TASKS OR WORK ARE THEY TRYING TO PERFORM WHICH IS PRECISELY THE TWO QUESTIONS THAT ARE REQUIRED IN THE ADA THAT CAN BE ASKED. JUST TO BE CLEAR;–I UNDERSTAND REPRESENTATIVE GREENS RESPONSES TO OUR SUGGESTIONS DRIVER MISDEMEANOR FOR DENIAL OF ACCESS OR INTERFERENCE BUT THE PENALTIES THAT REPRESENTATIVE GREENE ARE REFERRING TO OUR CIVIL PENALTIES. WE ARE SUGGESTING IF YOU CAN MAKE IT A CRIME; MISREPRESENT THAT WE SHOULD ALSO MAKE IT A CRIME TO DENY ACCESS. SO THERE BE ONE CIVIL. THIS WOULD BE CRIMINAL.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM BEALS I’M FINE MR. CHAIR>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE PINTO>>REPRESENTATIVE PINTO: IF THE ANIMAL IN QUESTION IS JUST DOGS WOULD MAKE A MAKE SENSE OF THE LANGUAGE BE ABOUT DOG STUFF SOME CLARITY FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED? IF YOU THINK OF THE SERVICE ANIMAL YOU THINK OF SOMETHING BROADER.>>REPRESENTATIVE GREEN: I THINK WE CAN CONTINUE TO DEBATE THIS BUT THAT’S WHAT THE BILL SAYS. WE ARE REFERENCING LAW WE HAVE GIVEN IN THE BILL PROVISION FOR STICKERS TO BE MADE TO BE PUT UP TO TELL PEOPLE THE LAWS GOING INTO THAT ESTABLISHMENT AND BASICALLY WHAT THE LAWS ARE BOTH FOR MINNESOTA NOW IF THIS PASSES AND ALSO ADA AND SO I THINK THAT THE BILL IS COMPLETE. I THINK IT’S WHAT WE NEED AND I THINK ALL THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU ARE ASKING AND PROVISIONS THAT ARE BEING BROUGHT UP ARE ADDRESSED IN THIS BILL NOW. YES; YOU MIGHT HAVE TO LOOK AT THE STATUTE BUT IT IS THERE.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE PINTO>>REPRESENTATIVE PINTO: I MAY JUST ENCOURAGE I FEEL LIKE IT COULD BE THE NOTICE ETC. BE CLEAR IF IT’S A PARTICULAR KIND OF ANIMAL BUT THE OTHER QUESTION IS; DOES HAVE TO DO WITH THE PARALLELISM HERE AND THIS MAY BE IS FOR HOUSE RESEARCH AS TO WHAT; IF THIS IS SE T UP IF THERE’S A PETTY MISDEMEANOR AND MISDEMEANOR ON THE ONE SIDE FOR MISREPRESENTING AN ANIMAL WHAT IS THE PENALTY RIGHT NOW? WHAT WILL THE PENALTY BE FOR EXCLUDING A SERVICE ANIMAL? LIKE A PROPER SERVICE ANIMAL FROM A STORE IF I CAN IS THAT MR. CHAIR?>>CHAIR JOHNSON: MR. JOHNSON>>STAFF: WE ARE LOOKING THEN AT THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT AND WITHIN THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT WE ARE DOING WITH SUCH AN 363 A 130. THAT IS CENTRAL A GENERAL CATCHALL DIVISION AND SUBDIVISION FOR WHICH IS UNFAIR DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICE IN MISDEMEANOR. I’M JUST GOING TO READ IT BECAUSE OF THE FAIRLY SHORTS ON AND IN ADDITION TO ALL OTHER REMEDIES PROVIDED UNDER THIS CHAPTER; EVERY PERSON WHO COMMITS AND UNFAIR DISCRIMINATORY ACT AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 363 360 3A .11 OR AIDS ABOUT INSIGHT COMPELS OR COURSES ANOTHER TO DO SO SHALL BE GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR.>>REPRESENTATIVE PINTO: ONE FINAL QUESTION THEM. I GUESS THE BABY TO MR. ELWOOD. IT SOUND LIKE ACTUALLY DISK INVENTORY PRACTICE EXCLUDING A SERVICE ANIMAL COULD VERY WELL BE A MISDEMEANOR IN WHICH CASE THERE WOULD BE THE PARALLELISM ON BOTH SIDES CAN YOU JUST COMMENT ON THAT? IT JUST SEEMED TO ME THAT MAKE SENSE THAT IF YOU MISREPRESENT AN ANIMAL THAT IS ONE THING AND IF YOU HAVE AN ACTUAL ANIMAL THAT’S BEEN BLOCKED THAT SHOULD BE THE SAME.>>TESTIFIER: I THINK THAT IS KIND OF WHAT WE WERE GETTING AT IN MAKING THE CONNECTION THE DOTS BECAUSE THE 29 STATES -OF THE 29 STATES THAT YOU CRIMINALIZE INTERFERING 11 OF THOSE ALSO CRIMINALIZE MISREPRESENTATION. SO THEY HAVE A PARALLEL STRUCTURE. I JUST THINK AS WE RECOMMENDED EARLIER IN CROSS-REFERENCING THE CIVIL REMEDIES I THINK IT WOULD BE TIGHTER TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE SORT OF SAYING WHAT’S GOOD FOR THE GANDER MAKING IT CRYSTAL-CLEAR IN THE STATUTE. THIS IS A NEW THING NOW; PUTTING IN A CRIME OF MISREPRESENTATION.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM>>REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM: SO IT IS CLEAR THAT THERE’S A MISDEMEANOR IN THE LAW CURRENTLY. THE QUESTION IS; WHO IS CHARGED WITH CHARGING THAT OFFENSE. WHAT JURISDICTION WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO CHARGE HIM WITH THAT MISDEMEANOR?>>TESTIFIER: THE LAW IS SILENT ON THAT AT THIS POINT. SO I DON’T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT. I WOULD ASSUME THE MISTY MISDEMEANOR WOULD EITHER BE CITY COUNTY OR POSSIBLY ATTY. GEN. BUT I CAN’T SAY FOR CERTAIN RIGHT NOW.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM BEALS MAY BE BETWEEN NOW AND THE FOUR WE COULD MAKE IT CLEAR IN YOUR BILL COULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY OR LACK OF AUTHORITY TO DO THE MISDEMEANOR YOU ARTIE REFERENCED.>>REPRESENTATIVE GREEN: ACTUALLY WILL LOOK INTO THAT REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: WITH THAT I WILL RENEW MY MOTION SPIRIT FOR HOUSE HOUSE FILE 3157 TO THE GENERAL REGISTER AS AMENDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY; AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES.] OPPOSED; NAY.>>[GAVEL]>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THANK YOU. WE WILL BRING UP HOUSE FILE 3504. REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS. I BELIEVE YOUR BILL IS GOING TO CIVIL LAW WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION>>REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS: THAT’S MY MOTION.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: EMOTION IS TO SPIRIT FOR TO CIVIL LAW. GO AHEAD REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS>>REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS: THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. MEMBERS;. HOUSE FILE THREE 504 DEALS WITH A DATABASE THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING USED LEGALLY TO IDENTIFY GANG MEMBERS AND CURRENTLY FOLLOWING CHANGES TO THE LEGISLATION THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT REACHED TO PURGE NAMES OF THE CONVICTED GANG MEMBER DATABASE FOLLOWING THREE YEARS AFTER THE LAST COURT CONVICTION ADJUDICATION OR STATE ADJUDICATION OF THAT INDIVIDUAL. WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT MANY INDIVIDUALS ARE HAVING THEIR NAMES PURGED WHILE CURRENTLY INCARCERATED BUT STILL PARTICIPATING ON GANG ACTIVITY WHILE INCARCERATED ON THE PENAL FACILITY. THIS BILL WOULD CHANGE START OF THAT THREE-YEAR CLOCK TO BE UPON RELEASE. SO THAT ASSUMING THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE STILL PARTICIPATING IN ONGOING GAME CRITERIA THAT IS DOCUMENTED BY THE FACILITY IN THE COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTIONS THAT THAT THREE-YEAR TIMELINE WOULD BEGIN ONCE THE INDIVIDUAL IS RELEASED FROM PRISON. THE BEHAVIOR; THERE’S A SET OF CRITERIA THAT NEED TO BE MET IN ORDER TO BE PLACED IN THE DATABASE THAT QUALIFIES AS GANG-RELATED ACTIVITY. THOSE ACTIVITIES NEED TO BE CONTINUED TO BE DOCUMENTED WHILE IN CUSTODY UNDER THE COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTIONS THAT HAVE TO BE DOCUMENTED INN THAT DOCUMENTATION CAN BE USED TO MAINTAIN THAT PERSON’S INCLUSION IN THE GANG DATABASE. RIGHT NOW; CURRENTLY OFFICER SAFETY IS BEING JEOPARDIZED AS INDIVIDUALS ARE REMOVED FROM THE LIST WALLACE OF THEIR PRISON TERM WHILE OFTEN TIMES STILL PARTICIPATING IN PRISON GANGS ACTIVITIES ARE STILL RUNNING WITH THEIR GANG MEMBERS WELL IN CUSTODY. THEY ARE RELEASED. THERE NO LONGER INCLUDED IN THAT GANG DATABASE EVEN THOUGH THEIR ACTIVITY AND THEIR GANG MEMBERSHIP REALLY NEVER LAPSED. IT JUST IS NOT BEEN DOCUMENTED WHILE THEY WERE IN CUSTODY. I’VE AND THE SCHOOL BEEN FROM CHIEFS ASSOCIATION WHO CAN PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE DETAIL AND THEN I THINK IF WE HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DATABASE ITSELF WE HAVE INDIVIDUALS IN THE AUDIENCE THAT CAN BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THANK YOU. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND PROCEED.>>TESTIFIER: FOR THE RECORD MY NAME IS ANDY SCRIVEN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOCIATION. OUR ASSOCIATION REPRESENTS MORE THAN 500 LAW ENFORCEMEN T LEADERS INCLUDING MORE THAN 300 POLICE CHIEFS AND COMMITTEES LARGE AND SMALL URBAN AND RURAL ALL ACROSS MINNESOTA. I WANT TO THINK REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS FOR OFFERING THE BILL AND FOR YOUR TIME. TODAY TO YOU WHAT OUR MEMBERS FEELS VERY IMPORTANT PIECE OF LEGISLATION. THE COMMITTAL GANG INVESTIGATIVE SYSTEM IS WHEN RESOURCES POLICE OFFICERS USED TO INVESTIGATE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY AND OBTAIN INFORMATION ON PEOPLE WHO ARE SUSPECTED OF CRIMES. IT’S A TOOL USED BY POLICE OFFICERS ON THE STREET TO HELP THEM GET A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF SOMEONE’S GANG AFFILIATION. THE BILL BEFORE YOU TODAY WILL MAKE THIS A BETTER TOOL AND A MORE SOUND RESOURCE. IT WILL HELP OFFICERS BETTER PROTECT THEMSELVES AND ULTIMATELY THE CITIZENS ARE COMMUNICATED OUR ASSOCIATION STANCE AND POST PART OF THE BILL CLOSES A LOOPHOLE THAT ALLOWS AS REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS THAT INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS WERE STILL PARTICIPATING DOCUMENTED GANG ACTIVITY BEHIND BARS TO BE PURGED FROM THE DATABASE. ONCE THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE RELEASED FROM PRISON ANY OFFICER WHO COMES IN CONTACT WITH THEM WILL HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR ACTIVITIES OR AFFILIATIONS AND THAT COULD PUT THEIR SAFETY AT RISK. I THINK OF YOUR TIME AND ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF HOUSE FILE 3504.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE HOWE>>REPRESENTATIVE HOWE: REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS; IS THERE A REASON WHY WE DON’T MAKE IT AFTER THEY ARE DONE WITH THEIR SERVICE COMPLETELY? SUCH AS PROBATION? THAT TYPE OF THING. WE JUST DO IT UPON RELEASE?>>REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS: THIS DATABASE GOING BACK SEVERAL YEARS HAS BEEN THE FOCUS OF A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT YOU CONTINUE TO AGGREGATE AND COLLECT INFORMATION ON INDIVIDUALS AND KIND OF GET GIVE SOMEONE A SCARLET LETTER OF GANG ACTIVITY WORKING MEMBERSHIP. THE CONTINUATION OF THREE YEARS WITHIN THE SYSTEM WAS A NEGOTIATED TIMEFRAME FROM SEVERAL YEARS AGO. THIS JUST STARTS THAT CLOCK AS IT WERE UPON RELEASE IF THERE IS DOCUMENTED GANG BEHAVIOR WHILE THE INDIVIDUAL IS IN THE CUSTODY OF THE COMMISSIONER OF CORRECTIONS. I’M NOT SURE TRYING TO LENGTHEN OR REHASH AN ARGUMENT ROUND DATA PRIVACY BUT THIS LEGISLATURE HAS HAD PREVIOUS [INAUDIBLE] SERVING HERE WHEN I’M TRYING TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT TIMEFRAME IS AN ACCURATE REPRESENTATION AND BEGINS WHEN SOMEONE IS RELEASED FROM CUSTODY.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE DEHN>>REPRESENTATIVE DEHN: SO WHEN I THINK OF THE THREE-YEAR BEGINNING AT THE TIME OF RELEASE WHY IS IT THAT THE TIME OF RELEASE FROM INCARCERATION VERSUS LIKE TIME OF RELEASE FROM SUPERVISION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? BECAUSE AN INDIVIDUAL COULD BE UNDER SUPERVISION FOR FIVE YEARS AFTER THEY ARE RELEASED BUT ACCORDING TO THE WAY YOU HAVE WRITTEN THIS BILL THE CONTINUATION WOULD ONLY BE FOR THAT THREE REMAINING YEARS. THEN WHEN YOU BRING UP THE ISSUE OF DOCUMENTED INCIDENTS OF GANG ACTIVITY WOULDDN’T THAT -MY HEAD GOES TOO WELL WHY WOULD THAT BE SORT OF A STARTING PERIOD INSTEAD OF SOME OTHER DATES?>>REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS: I THINK BASED ON SUPERVISION OR DATE OF RELEASE THAT CAN BACK TO REPRESENTATIVE HOWE’S QUESTION IN THE IDEA OF NOT TRYING TO REWRITE STATUTE FROM A NEGOTIATED POSITION FROM SEVERAL YEARS AGO ABOUT THE RETENTION OF NAMES WITHIN THE GANG DATABASE AND SO I’M NOW TRYING TO RE-OPEN UP THAT DATA PRIVACY DISCUSSION AND WERE STARTING TO ON THE DAY OF RELEASE THE THREE-YEAR TIMETABLE NO T BECAUSE-BECAUSE I THINK THAT’S WHAT WE CAN GET PAST QUITE FRANKLY. WHY WOULDN’T IT START ON THE DATE OF THE LAST DOCUMENTED GANG ACTIVITY WITHIN THE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY. WE THINK IT’S JUST A LOT EASIER TO KEEP TRACK OF TO DO IT UPON RELEASE FROM THE FACILITY.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: ANY PUBLIC TESTIMONY? IF NOT; THERE DOESN’T APPEAR TO BE REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS DO YOU WISH TO RENEW YOUR MOTION?>>REPRESENTATIVE ZERWAS: MEMBERS THANK YOU FOR THE TIME. I RENEW MY MOTION HOUSE FILE 3504 TO BE BE REFERRED TO CIVIL LAW>>CHAIR JOHNSON: ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY; AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES.] OPPOSED; NAY. THANK YOU.>>[GAVEL]>>CHAIR JOHNSON: NEXT WE HAVE HOUSE FILE 1180 REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM. BEGIN .>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: PLEASED TO BE HERE THIS MORNING TO PRESENT HOUSE FILE 1180. I UNDERSTAND THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT GOING TO WAYS AND MEANS.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THAT IS CORRECT.>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: I HAVE REPRESENTATIVE FRANK HORNSTEIN WITH ME TODAY; TOO AND I WANT TO REITERATE THIS A BIPARTISAN BILL. THERE IS NO POLITICS IN THIS BILL IT’S IN MATTER OF SAVING PEOPLE’S LIVES IN THE CARNAGE THAT’S OUT ON THE ROAD TODAY. HOUSE FILE 1180 IS SUPPORTED BY>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM GIVE A MOTION FIRST?>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: I LIKE TO MOTION THIS GOES TO 1180 GOES TO HOUSTON WAYS AND MEANS>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THANK YOU>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: HOUSE FILE 1180 HAS BROUGHT SUPPORT. LA W ENFORCEMENT; THE TRUCKING ASSOCIATION EVEN THE BICYCLE LINES AND THE MOTORCYCLE GUYS ARE FOR THIS BECAUSE OF ALL THE FATALITIES THAT THEY HAVE HAD. MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL AND ALSO MANY OF YOU THAT I HAVE TO THANK YOU; MANY PEOPLE ON THIS COMMITTEE ARE COSPONSORS OF THIS BILL AND WE HAVE 35 OTHER COSPONSORS IN HOUSE AND I’M INTRODUCING A CLONE BILL BECAUSE MORE AUTHORS WANT TO BE ON IT AND OF COURSE YOU KNOW 35 IS THE MAXIMUM WE CAN FIT ON THE GREEN JACKETS. I’VE MANY TESTIFIERS WILL BE RESPECTFUL OF EVERY TIME BUT THIS CELL PHONE HANDS-FREE BILL DOES EXACTLY THAT. YOU CAN USE YOUR CELL PHONE. IT HAS TO BE IN A HANDS-FREE MODE.. THERE OVER 15 STATES AND OVER 110 MILLION PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY DRIVING UNDER THESE TYPES OF PROVISIONS AROUND THE COUNTRY. SO IT HAS EXEMPTIONS FOR GPS IF YOU HAVE A GPS. ALSO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT IN EMERGENCY AND IF YOU HAVE TO DIAL 911 . IF YOU CHECK YOU WILL SEE THERE IS MANY EXEMPTIONS IN THE BILL FOR EMERGENCY SITUATIONS. THE BILL ITSELF BASICALLY DOES NOT CHANGE THE PENALTIES MY BILL DOES NOT CHANGE THE PENALTIES. IT LEAVES THE PENALTIES THE SAME I HAVE HAD NUMEROUS PEOPLE COME UP TO ME AND SAY; HE WOULD LOVE TO SEE GREATER PENALTIES. I THINK REPRESENTATIVE FRANKE IS A BILL THAT’S MOVING THROUGH THE COMMITTEES THAT DOESN’T DO THAT; BUT ACTUALLY THE FINE IS $50 THE FIRST TIME AND A TICKET THE SECOND ONE IS 225 A TICKET THE SECOND ONE IS $225. SO WE DO NOT INCREASE THE FINES. THE BILL BASICALLY IS A PRETTY SIMPLE BILL AND TO MY KNOWLEDGE HAS NO OPPOSITION. MR. CHAIR; THAT IS THE CONCLUSION OF MY REMARKS. I WILL STAND BY FOR QUESTIONS AND WEAVE A NUMBER OF TESTIFIERS UNLESS REPRESENTATIVE HORNSTEIN HAS SOMETHING TO SAY>>CHAIR JOHNSON: BE READY HORNSTEIN>>REPRESENTATIVE HORNSTEIN: I WANT TO THANK REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM FOR HIS GREAT WORK ON THIS BUT WE BEEN COLLABORATED ON THIS FOR A COUPLE YEARS NOW AND ONE THING I WANT TO ADD TO THE COMMITTEE IS THAT WE HAVE SEVERAL SOURCES OF DEATH AND INJURY ON THE ROADWAYS. SPEEDING; DWI; SEATBELT-LACK OF SEATBELT USE. WE HAVE GOT A HANDLE ON REDUCING INJURIES AND FATALITIES ON THOSE OTHER THREE. BUT DISTRACTION IS THE FASTEST-GROWING IT’S NOT NECESSARILY THE NUMBER ONE SOURCE OF PROBLEMS ON THE HIGHWAY BUT IS THE FASTEST-GROWING ONE. WHEN WE LOOK AT ALL OF THE NEW TECHNOLOGIES AVAILABLE TO DISTRACT PEOPLE WHILE THEY ARE DRIVING WE’VE GOT TO GET A HANDLE ON IT. THIS BILL WERE REALLY HELP LAW ENFORCEMENT PARTICULARLY ENFORCE THE TEXTING BAN WHICH WE PASSED SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND WILL COME I THINK I MIGHT BE A HUGE HELP TO REDUCING THE DEVON DEATH AND INJURIES WE HAVE ON THE ROAD DUE TO DISTRACTION. SO I CAN APPRECIATE YOUR HEARING THIS BILL MR. CHAIRAND VERY MUCH APPRECIATE ALL THE SUPPORT WE’VE HAD AND PARTICULARLY THE FAMILIES THAT BEEN AFFECTED BY THIS.. IT’S BEEN VERY POWERFUL VOICES IN SUPPORT OF THE LEGISLATION.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE HOWE>>REPRESENTATIVE HOWE: IM ON THE BILL AS A CO-AUTHOR BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION ON LIN E 1.11-1.2 WHERE IT WAS STRUCK WHEN THE SYSTEM IS USED EXCLUSIVELY FOR NAVIGATIONAL PURPOSES AND ITS ADDED THAT IT PHYSICALLY INTEGRATED INTO THE FIELD. EXACTLY WHAT IS MEANT BY THAT? DOES THAT MEAN I CAN PLUG -I’VE GOT ONE OF THOSE HOLDERS AND I PLUG IT IN TO THE CIGARETTE LIGHTER MACHINE . I PLUG IT INTO THAT ORIFICE AND ATTACH MY CELL PHONE AND I CAN NAVIGATE FROM THERE? IS THAT PHYSICALLY INTEGRATED? OR; IF I HAVE A LITTLE PAD THAT I SET IT ON I CAN LOOK AT IT IS THAT PHYSICALLY INTEGRATED? HOW DOES THIS WORK ?>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. YOU JUST SAID IT’S ATTACHED. WHEN YOU PLUG IT IN IT IS ATTACHED TO THE AND THAT’S THE LAWS THROUGHOUT THE OTHER PARTS OF THE UNITED STATES ARE BEING ENFORCED TO MY KNOWLEDGE.>>REPRESENTATIVE HOWE: I WOULD HOPE THAT SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WILL LINE WE HAD A DEFINITION OF INTEGRATED BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT THING AS FAR AS LAW ENFORCEMENT BEEN ABLE TO HAVE IT IN THE COURT TO BE ABLE TO DETERMINE WHAT INTEGRATED IS. I THINK IS PROBABLY IMPORTANT TO DEFINE WHAT INTEGRATED IS NOT WHERE IT GOES ONTO THE PICTURE SCREEN OF THE NEWER VEHICLES I GUESS SOME OF US STILL DR IVE 20-YEAR-OLD VEHICLES AND DON’T HAVE THE LUXURY OF HAVING THAT CAPABILITY. THE OTHER QUESTION I HAVE-THIS IS NOT IN YOUR HANDOUT BUT IT IS A HANDOUT MAYBE I SHOULD WAIT UNTIL THOSE FOLKS COME OUT BUT IS IT TRUE THAT IN ILLINOIS THE ACTUAL FATALITY WENT UP WHEN THEY STARTED THIS BILL? THAT’S WHAT THIS CHART SEEMS TO SAY.>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: REPRESENTATIVE HOWE PREPS MINNESOTA STATE COUNCIL CAN SPEAK TO THAT>>REPRESENTATIVE HOWE: WE CAN WAIT UNTIL HE TESTIFIED. THAT WOULD BE FINE.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE CONSIDINE>>REPRESENTATIVE CONSIDINE: I’M GOING TO SUPPORT YOUR BILL. I THINK IT’S BASICALLY A GOOD IDEA B UT I DON’T WANT PEOPLE TO THINK IT’S A GOOD IDEA TO TALK ON A CELL PHONE EVEN WITH HER HANDS-FREE DEVICE. YOU ARE STILL DISTRACTED. A CHICKEN WING STILL DISTRACTION. A COUPLE COFFEE IS STILL DISTRACTION. I DON’T WANT TO SEND THE SIGNAL THAT BECAUSE YOU ARE DOING HANDS-FRE E THAT YOU ARE SAFE. YOU ARE NOT. IT’S STILL A DISTRACTION. SO LIKE I SAID I’M SUPPORTING THE BILL BUT I DON’T WANT TO SEND THE WRONG SIGNAL THAT OKAY; YOU ARE USING A HANDS-FREE DEVICE. IT IS OKAY. I’VE BEEN ON FOR 94 AND SEEN SOMEBODY USING A HANDS-FREE DEVICE AND WAVING THEIR ARMS WHILE THEY’RE TALKING AND OBVIOUSLY VERY INVOLVED IN THE CONVERSATION AND STILL DISTRACTED. WHEN YOU ARE DRIVING WHEN YOU’RE BEHIND THE WHEEL YOU NEED TO BE DRIVING AND PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT’S GOING ON. NOT DOING ANYTHING ELSE. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO>>REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO: TO REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM SOMETHING REPRESENTATIVE HOWE DISSECTED TO PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE THAT WOULD NOT BE INTEGRATED JUST MY OWN PURPOSES OF CLARIFICATION AND WOULD BE TRUE THAT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE INTEGRATED WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE AUDIO SYSTEM IS ALSO PLAYING THROUGH THE SPEAKERS ETC. FOR GPS NOW NAVIGATION BUT I’VE BEEN IN VEHICLES AND I DON’T HAVE ONE OF THESE BILLS BUT I’VE BEEN IN VEHICLES WHERE THERE’S A SCREEN A MONITOR THAT IS EITHER IN THE CENTER IT’S ON THE DASHBOARD THAT IS IN THE LINE OF SIGHT OF THE DRIVER THAT WHILE THE AUDIO SYSTEM IS PLAIN TELLING THEM LEFT; RIGHT; HOW MANY MORE MILES I NEED TO GO; THERE IS A SCREEN THAT THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE CAN LOOK AT THAT IS PART OF THE VEHICLE. WOULD THAT BE AN EXAMPLE OF AN INTEGRATED SYSTEM?>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: YES. THAT IS EIGHT INTEGRATED SYSTEM. WE DO HAVE THE MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL HERE TO DEMONSTRATE SOME OF THE METHODS OF HANDS-FREE AND THE INTEGRATION HERE LATER ON IN OUR TESTIMONY.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE>>REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO: TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE THEN; SO THE SCREEN EXAMPLE I JUST PROVIDED THAT WOULD BE PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE BILL IF I UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY WITHIN A MOBILE PHONE OPERATING IN NAVIGATION MODE DISPLAYING A VERY SIMILAR–THE ROAD; LEFT; RIGHT TURNS; THINGS LIKE THAT; LEANING UP OR MAYBE VELCRO OR HOWEVER IT IS A FIXED; ATTACHED; AND THE EXACT SAME LOCATION WITHOUT SCREEN THAT’S INTEGRATED WOULD BE WOULD BE NOT PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE LAW; IS THAT CORRECT?>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: NO. THAT’S IN A HANDS-FREE MODE REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO. WE DO HAVE COL. LANGE HERE THAT CAN TALK ABOUT THAT ; TO FROM THE MINNESOTA HIGHWAY PATROL BUT THAT IS NOT A HANDS-FREE TO . THAT IS A CELL PHONE AND HANDS-FREE MODE. JUST TO REITERATE A LITTLE BIT; WHEN I AM USING MY PHONE IS A GPS DEVICE OF COURSE I SIMPLY PUT IT ON SPEAKER; SET IT DOWN AND GIVES ME THE TURN BY TURN NAVIGATION VERBALLY. IT’S EASIEST THING IN THE WORLD OVER 90% OF THE PEOPLE IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA NOW HAVE SMART PHONES THAT HAVE THE CAPABILITY COULD IF THEY DO NOT AGAIN THE MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL SHOWS AND DEMONSTRATE JUST HOW EASY IT IS TO TAKE THE PHONE THAT MAY BE OBSOLETE AND MAKE IT AT THAT CAPABILITY.>>REPRESENTATIVE LUCERO: ONE MORE QUICK FOLLOW-UP. THAT’S AN IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION. I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE AN EXAMPLE THEN OF A MOBILE PHONE IN NAVIGATI ON MODE THAT IN A HANDS-FREE MODE SO THE DRIVERS NOT TOUCHING IT THE AUDIO IS COMING OUT OF THE MOBILE PHONE WAS COMING OUT OF THE SPEAKERS BLUETOOTH INTEGRATED; THE VISUAL PORTION OF THE MOBILE PHONE IN GPS MODE THAT MIGHT BE ATTACHED TO A LINE OF SIGHT POSITION OF THE DRIVER; THAT WOULD STILL BE PERMITTED UNDER THIS BILL?>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: YES. IT IS HANDS-FREE.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: WE DO HAVE SOME TESTIFIERS. COL. MATT LANGER. WELCOME TO THE COMMITTEE. STATE YOUR NAME AND PROCEED.>>TESTIFIER: MY NAME IS MAP LANGER I HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF SERVING CHIEF OF MINNESOTA STATE PATROL. I APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS THAT BEEN ASKED IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY I DON’T NEED TO CONVINCE ANYONE HERE THAT THIS DISTRACTED DRIVING IS A PROBLEM IN AROSE THAT MANY PEOPLE ARE KILLED AND INJURED AS A RESULT OF PEOPLE DRIVING IN THE DISTRACTED FASHION. SEVERAL PEOPLE WILL TESTIFY FROM THEIR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WHAT I WANT TO BRING FORWARD TO YOU IS FROM THE ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE THE CHALLENGE WITH ENFORCING THE TEXTING BAN WHICH OF COURSE BEEN ILLEGAL FOR QUITE SOME TIME INCLUDING AN ENHANCEMENT FOR SUBSEQUENT OFFENSE. OUR CHALLENGE IS GETTING THE INITIAL FENCE; NOT SO MUCH EVEN THINK ABOUT THE SUBSEQUENT OFFENSE BECAUSE FROM A REALITY STANDPOINT IF I’M DRIVING UP TO SOMEONE AND I’M GOING DOWN THE ROAD IS ONE OF OUR STATE TROOPERS COUNTY SHERIFF DEPUTIES OR PEACE OFFICERS THAT I LOOK OVER AND THAT’S I SEE SOMEONE WITH THEIR DEVICE DOING THIS; THEY’RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE ROAD IN FRONT OF THEM; THE TROOPER MAKES A TRAFFIC STOP IN WITH A MORE OFTEN THAN NOT ENCOUNTER IS THE QUESTION OF; ARE YOU TEXTING; THAT’S A LEGAL MINNESOTA WHICH THE RESPONSES; NO; NO I’M TEXTING I WAS LOOKING FOR A PHONE NUMBER. WE ARE CURRENT LAW IS WRITTEN THAT IS LEGAL. IT’S ILLEGAL TO TEXT. LEGAL TO LOOK FOR A PHONE NUMBER AND DRIVE ALTHOUGH YOU STILL HAVE TO BE DRIVING WITH REASONABLE AND YOU CARE TO THEIR SOME ARGUMENT WITH HOW WE CAN HANDLE THOSE SITUATIONS. PLAIN LANGUAGE WITH THIS BILL DOES IT SAYS JUST PUT THE PHONE DOWN AND DRIVE. SO YOU CAN STILL MAKE A PHONE CALL. YES; THERE’S AN ARGUMENT WHETHER OR NOT YOU’RE STILL SAFE WH EN YOU’RE MAKING A PHONE CALL AND WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE DISTRACTED BUT ALISHA THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT’S IN FRONT OF YOU BY PUTTING THE PHONE DOWN AND REMOVING THAT ROADSIDE ARGUMENT BETWEEN LAW ENFORCEM ENT AND THE MOTORING PUBLIC ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR A PHONE NUMBER; LOOKING FOR AN ADDRESS; SEARCHING IS A LOW AS WE SAW IN A RECENT EXAMPLE THAT ENDED IN A DESK OR TEXT WE’VE A FAIR NUMBER DRIVERS [INAUDIBLE] AND THEY RECOGNIZE WHAT THEY WERE DOING AS WRONG BUT MORE OFTEN THAN NOT THERE IS CONFUSION ROADSIDE AND SOME GOOD HEALTHY QUESTIONING ABOUT WHY IS IT LEGAL TO LOOK FOR A PHONE NUMBER-I SAY LEGAL; ARGUMENT IS NOT PART OF TEXTING OFFENSE BUT ILLEGAL TO TEXT WHEN BOTH OF THEM HAVE THE EXACT SA ME DRIVING CONSEQUENCE TO ALL OF US. WHEN WE ARE ON THE ROAD. SO FROM AN ENFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE ON BEHALF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY WE DO SUPPORT THIS BILL AND WE THINK IT WOULD BE A NECESSARY AND GOOD BEHAVIOR SHIFT FROM MINNESOTANS AND WE WOULD JOIN I THINK WE BE THE 14TH STATE NATIONWIDE -15? SO WE ARE NOT ON THE CUTTING EDGE ON THIS. WE’RE NOT GOING FIRST OF SOMETIMES IT FEELS THAT WAY WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE LANGUAGE BUT IF THERE’S NOT ANY QUESTIONS I’LL LET OTHER PEOPLE TESTIFY WITH THEIR HEARTFELT STORIES.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE WARD>>REPRESENTATIVE WARD: THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS. JUST A COMMENT. MY DAUGHTER LIVED IN NEW YORK FOR NUMBER OF YEARS AND IT MUST’VE BEEN 15 YEARS AGO THAT IT WAS MADE VERY CLEAR YOU DON’T EVEN HAVE A PHONE IN YOUR HAND IN NEW YORK AND OFFICER SEES WITH A PHONE IN YOUR HAND AND AT THAT TIME REALLY WAS UP TO YOUR EAR; YOU GOT STOPPED AND GOT A TICKET. SO I THINK WE’VE GOT A LONG WAY TO GO.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE BECKER-FINN>>REPRESENTATIVE BECKER-FINN: I ALSO WAS ONE OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT WOULD HAVE LIKE TO BE ON THE BILL BUT IT HIT THE-I WAS GLAD TO HEAR THAT WILL BE A CLONE BECAUSE AM VERY SUPPORTIVE BUT THE THING I WANT TO COMMENT WAS RELATED TO WH AT COL. LANGER SPOKE TO AS FAR AS THE CONFUSION ABOUT WHAT IS LEGAL AND WHAT IS NOT. ACTUALLY I SPOKE TO MY SONS IS GREAT CLASS A COUPLE MONTHS AGO AND I TO QUICKLY COME UP WITH A BILL THEY COULD UNDERSTAND AND I TALKED ABOUT HOW SEVERAL YEARS AGO THE LEGISLATURE MADE IT ILLEGAL TO TEXT AND DRIVE AND THE ENTIRE REST OF MY CONVERSATION WITH A BUNCH OF FIRST-GRADERS; WELL WHAT IF MY MOM IS AT A STOP SIGN . WHAT IF SHE’S HOLDING IT DOWN HERE? WHAT IF MY DAD-SO IT JUST WAS REALLY CLEAR TO ME THAT THE BEHAVIOR IS HAPPENING A LOT AND HER KIDS ARE SEEING US ; SEEING FOLKS USING THEIR PHONES AND BEING DISTRACTED AND THE SAME WAY THAT MY PARENTS TAUGHT ME LIKE I CAN’T EVEN MOVE IN A VEHICLE UNTIL MY SEATBELT ON BECAUSE IT DOESN’T FEEL RIGHT WE ARE ALSO NOW SENDING THE MESSAGE TO THE YOUNGER GENERATION THAT YOU PUT THE PHONE IN YOUR PERSON IN THE BACKSEAT WERE JUST COMPLETELY OUT OF SIGHT AND OUT OF YOUR GRASP TO REALLY STOP THE BEHAVIOR. SO I THINK IT’S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE ARE DOING THIS NOW AND WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT YOU CAN HAVE THE PHONE IN YOUR HAND WHILE YOU’ RE DRIVING. I THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I ABSOLUTELY THINK IT IS NECESSARY EVEN IF A FIRST GRADER CANAL UNDERSTAND THEN WE SHOULD CERTAINLY EXPECT OUR ADULT DRIVERS AND EVEN TEENAGE DRIVERS TO UNDERSTAND. SO THANK YOU.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THANK YOU. BOB JOHNSON.>>TESTIFIER:>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: WE HAVE MITCH COULTER PINCHHITTING FOR BOB JOHNSON THIS MONEY.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THANK YOU.>>TESTIFIER: GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS MARK ALTHOUGH VICE PRESIDENT OF PUBL IC AFFAIRS FOR THE INSURANCE FEDERATION OF MINNESOTA. THE ISM IS A STATE TRADE ASSOCIATION FOR PROPERTY-CASUALTY INSURANCE FOR PURPOSE OF THIS DISCUSSION PROPERTY CASUALTY IS AUTO INSURANCE. WE ARE THE FOLKS THAT BROUGHT AUTO INSURANCE TO MINNESOTA CONSUMERS THAT YOU HEAR SOME TESTIMONY OF A VERY PERSONAL NATURE IN A FEW MINUTES SO THIS ISSUES VERY PERSONAL FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE ROOM. I’M HERE REALLY TO PRESENT THE ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE. I WAS PUT THAT INTO TWO AREAS. FIRST FOR CONSUMERS AND ALSO FOR BUSINESSES. FOR CONSUMERS WE DO COMPILE SOME STATISTICS ON AVERAGE AUTO INSURANCE PREMIUMS IN MINNESOTA. FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS THERE WAS A LONG-TERM INCREASE IN AUTO INSURANCE PREMIUMS THAT PRETTY MUCH CORRESPONDED WITH THE RATE OF INFLATION. AROUND 2005 OR SO THOUGH BECAUSE OF PURE MILES DRIVEN; BECAUSE OF THE ECONOMIC FORMS THAT WE HAD BACK THEN RECESSION THERE WERE FEWER MILES DRIVEN WE SAW ABOUT A FIVE-YEAR PERIOD OF TIME WHERE THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF CRASHES REDUCED BY ABOUT 30% CLAIMS COST FOR MEMBER COMMITTEES REDUCED BY 30% IN AVERAGE PREMIUMS IN MINNESOTA REDUCED ABOUT 40% AND THEN ABOUT ROUGHLY AROUND 2010 OR SO WE SAW DISTURBING TREND THAT IS THAT LONG-TERM DECREASE OF ABOUT 30% STARTED TO LEVEL OFF. SO FOR ABOUT 2-3 YEARS WE HAD FLAT PREMIUMS AND A 40 THE LAST FIVE YEARS NOW WE HAVE SEEN A DEFINITE AND DISTINCT INCREASE IN CLAIMS COSTS WHICH IS INCREASE THE AVERAGE AUTO PREMIUM WE WERE PAYING ALMOST $900 A YEAR ON AVERAGE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE INSURANCE IN MINNESOTA BACK IN 2005 HE BOTTOMED OUT JUST $700 AND EVEN THE LAST FIVE YEARS OR NOW LOSING ABOUT 15% INCREASE IN CLAIMS COSTS WHICH HAS RESULTED ABOUT 15% INCREASE IN AVERAGE AUTO PREMIUMS FOR PERSONAL CARRIERS. LAST YEAR TO INSURANCE COMPANY CEOS WERE QUOTED IN NATIONAL PUBLICATIONS SAYING THAT DISTRACTED DRIVING IS AN EPIDEMIC THAT THEY ARE SEEN NATIONAL COMPANIES THERE AND SEEN AN INCREASE IN CLAIMS COST WHICH ARE BEING PASSED ALONG TO CONSUMERS IN THE FORM OF HIGHER INSURANCE PREMIUMS AND OUR NUMBERS DEFINITELY BEAR THAT OUT. ON A COMMERCIAL PERSPECTIVE WHERE THE BIGGEST COMPANIES THAT SOLD COMMERCIAL INSURANCE IS DOWN IN OWATONNA FEDERATED INSURANCE A GREAT MINNESOTA COMPANY HUNDREDS OF EMPLOYEES. THEY’RE NOT A HOUSEHOLD NAME BECAUSE THEY SELL MOSTLY COMMERCIAL LINES TO BUSINESS AND TRADE ASSOCIATION THEIR CEO JUST JEFF FETTERS WAS AT A ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION AT THE PROPONENTS HAD ABOUT A MONTH AGO OUT AT THE CORPORATE CAMPUS OF CARGO AND WAYZATA AND HE REENTERED THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A DISTURBING TREND FOR COMMERCIAL AUTO INSURANCE AND HIS STATISTIC WAS THAT ABOUT HALF; 50% OF ALL COMMERCIAL AUTO CLAIMS NOW T HAT HIS COMPANY IS SEEN INVOLVE SOME ELEMENT OF DESTRUCTION. NOT NECESSARILY ALWAYS SMART PHONE USE BUT HALF OF ALL THE CLAIMS ARE DISTRACTED AND MOST OF IT IS BECAUSE OF SMART PHONE USE. IT’S VERY UNFORTUNATE. SO BOTTOM LINE IS THAT FROM AN ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVE THERE IS A DEFINITE ECONOMIC COST TO DISTRACTED DRIVING IN MINNESOTA CONSUMERS AND BUSINESSES ARE PAYING THE PRICE FOR THAT. THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. ALL STANFORD QUESTIONS.>>REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM BEALS ON THE SUPPORT THE BILL BUT WILL INSURANCE RATES ACROSS MINNESOTA GO DOWN WHEN WE PASS THIS?>>TESTIFIER: OF COURSE THIS QUESTION THAT PEOPLE ASK ALL THE TIME. IT’S VERY DIFFICULT TO SAY BY HOW MUCH BUT I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THE DATA FROM 2005-2000 AND WAS A 30% REDUCTION IN CRASHES 30% REDUCTION IN CLAIMS COSTS AND 30% REDUCTION IN PREMEASURED ANYTHING THAT REDUCES CLAIMS COST AND WE THINK THIS BILL WOULD DO THAT BASED WHAT HAPPENED IN OTHER STATES; – EXCUSE ME – THAT DEFINITELY WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT YOU. WE CAN’T EXACTLY HOW MUCH WE KNOW THAT IT WOULD IF CLAIMS COST COME DOWN WHICH WE THINK THEY WILL.>>REPRESENTATIVE HILSTROM: REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM WILL WE SEE IN A REPORT AT THE END OF THIS TO CONFIRM INSURANCE RATES GO DOWN IF WE ARE LESS CRASHES?>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: JUST OPEN YOUR MAIL AND WATCH FOR YOUR PREMIUM. NO. I DON’T KNOW. WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO THAT BUT IT’S PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THANK YOU. NEXT TESTIFIERS WILL BE LISA CONES. GOOD MORNING. PLEASE DO YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND PROCEEDED>>TESTIFIER: MY NAME IS LISA COMBS WITH AN ASSOCIATE [INAUDIBLE] I’M HERE TODAY TO SHOW YOU SOME OF THE DIFFERENT OPTIONS YOU HAVE WITH UTILIZING YOUR CELL PHONE AND ONE TOUCH MODE TO MAKE IT EASY TO UTILIZE. MOST PHONES COME TODAY WHEN YOU PURCHASE THEM WITH OPTIONS THAT ARE READILY AVAILABLE.. THE ONE TOUCH PHONE THAT I HAVE WITH MY PHONE IT’S JUST AN EAR BUD AND SO YOU ONE EAR BUT NOT TO BECAUSE IT’S ILLEGAL TO HAVE TO COULD SIMPLY JUST PUSH THIS LITTLE PIECE THAT COMES WITH IT AND I CAN PUSH IT NEXT TO MY VOICE. PHONE HOME TO PUSH THIS AND IT SAYS THAT MY PHONE HUMAN HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PHONE; CALL HOME MY PHONE OUT IS CALLING HOME. IT DOES MY PHONE NUMBER AT THE ONE TOUCH RIGHT THERE. ONE TOUCH; CALL HOME MY PHONE IS GOI NG ON. NOW YOU DON’T HAVE TO HAVE A SMART PHONNE TO DO THAT. THERE’S OTHER OPTIONS. THE OPTIONS I’D LIKE TO SHOW YOU; SO THERE’S THIS SENSE YOU HAVE TO GO OUT AND PURCHASE A SMOKE SMARTPHONE IN ORDER TO MAKE THE TECHNOLOGY WITH YOU DON’T HAVE TO DO THAT. PROPONENTS THAT ARE OLDER THERE’S TECHNOLOGY WE JUST WENT TO THE DOLLAR STORE YOU CAN BUY TECHNOLOGY FOR OLDER PHONES AND YOU CAN BUY CABLES THAT YOU PLUG IN USB CABLES THAT PLUG RIGHT INTO YOUR PHONE THE PLUG-INS YOUR VEHICLE. YOU CAN HAVE SURROUNDSOUND IN YOUR VEHICLE DOESN’T MATTER THE AGE OF THE PHONE. DOESN’T MATTER THE AGE OF THE VEHICLE. THIS VERY SMART AND SIMPLE SOLUTIONS RIGHT FROM THE DOLLAR STORE THAT ARE AVAILABLE AND YOU CAN GO RIGHT ONLINE AND GOOGLE SOLUTIONS ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE AGE OF THE PHONE AND THE AGE OF THE VEHICLE ON HOW TO ADOPT THOSE SOLUTIONS TO VEHICLES BACK TO THE EARLY 80S AND VEHICLES THAT ARE FLIP PHONES TO MAKE THAT SOLUTION WORK WITHIN YOUR PHONES RANGE IN YOUR VEHICLE ‘S AGE. THERE’S ALL SORTS OF GADGETS OUT THERE. YOU CAN EVEN PUT IN THE SORT OF ONE TOUCH THAT PLUGS INTO A FLIP PHONE TO MAKE IT ONE TOUCH CAPABILITY TO YOU NOW ARE HANDS-FREE THAT FLIP PHONE. SO IN TERMS OF THINKING YOU HAVE TO GO OUT AND BUY SMART PHONES THAT’S NOT NECESSARILY THE CASE. YOU CAN STILL BE HANDS-FREE WITH THAT PHONE AND HAVE A FLIP PHONE IT’S NOT GOING TO COST YOU TO GO OUT AND HAVE TO BUY A BUNCH OF NEW PHONES. ANY QUESTIONS?>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THANK YOU. NEXT TESTIFIER; MICHAEL HANSEN. GOOD MORNING. PLEASE SAY YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND PROCEED.>>TESTIFIER: GOOD MORNING. BEATING MIKE HANSEN AND I CURRENTLY HAVE THE PRIVILEGE OF SERVING CITIZENS MINNESOTA AS THE DIRECTOR FOR THE OFFICE OF DRUG TRAFFIC SAFETY. AT THE OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY WE ARE IN THE BUSINESS OF RESEARCH AND STUDY PROGRAMMING ADMINISTRATION. WE HAVE LOOKED FOR THE OPPORTUNITIES AND FOR THE OPTIONS TO AFFECT DRIVER BEHAVIOR IN ORDER TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC SAFETY AND HIGHWAY SAFETY ACROSS THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. THE LEGISLATION THAT IS BEFORE YOU IS VERY SIMPLY THAT. IT’S ABOUT MODIFYING BEHAVIOR GETTING PEOPLE TO MAKE THE BETTER CHOICE ON THE WHEEL. HOPEFULLY; WE WILL SEE A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF PREVENTABLE TRAGEDIES THAT TAKE PLACE AS A RESULT OF THE BAD DECISIONS. THIS IS REALLY ; IF YOU LOOK AT THE SUCCESS THAT WE’VE HAD IN TRAFFIC SAFETY OF THE WAS MENTIONED EARLIER BUT ONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES WE HAVE GOT BETTER AT ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM OF IMPAIRED DRIVING OF SPEEDING IN A FOLKS WHO DO NOT PUT THEIR SEATBELT ON. BUT WHEN IT COMES TO DISTRACTION AND PARTICULARLY TO THE USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES IN MOTOR VEHICLES WE ARE SLIDING IN THE WRONG DIRECTION AND SO THIS IS KIND OF ONE OF THOSE INCREMENTAL CHANGES THAT NEEDS TO BE MADE IN ORDER FOR US TO CONTINUE TO MAKE MINNESOTA ROADS AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE. SO THE LEGISLATION IS EXACTLY THAT. AS COL. LANGER TESTIFIED; IT WILL MAKE ENFORCEMENT EASIER FOR THE TROOPERS OFFICERS AND DEPUTIES WHO ARE OUT THERE TRYING TO KEEP US SAFE AND IT WILL CHANGE DRIVER BEHAVIOR. THE DRIVERS NOTE THERE IS A CONSEQUENCE FOR BREAKING THE LAW. THEY’RE MUCH MORE LIKELY TO BE VOLUNTARILY FINDS. WE CAN GAIN THAT VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE ; WE WILL SAVE LIVES. WITH THAT I’LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FOR THE COMMITTEE.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. NEXT TESTIFIER IS JOHN AUSLANDER. SORRY ABOUT THAT.>>TESTIFIER: GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS JEAN JOHN-PRESENT MINNESOTA TRUCKING ASSOCIATION MINNESOTA TRUCKING ASSOCIATION IS A STATEWIDE SAFETY ORGANIZATION THAT REPRESENTS APPROXIMATELY SIX AND 51 CARRIERS AND THEIR ALLIED VENDORS. WE ARE HERE TODAY TO SUPPORT HOUSE FILE 1180. THEY’VE HEARD SOME OF THE STATISTICS OF A JUST ONCE I WANT TO ADD TO THE DEBATE IS THAT THE FACTS ARE INDISPUTABLE DISTRACTED DRIVING DOES CA USE CRASHES. ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL SAFETY COUNCIL IF SOMEONE IS TALKING ON A CELL PHONE IT PUTS THAT DRIVER AND ALL THE OTHER DRIVERS AROUND THEM TO FOUR TIMES GREATER RISK THAN THEIR UNDISTRACTED PEERS GETTING INTO A CRASH. FROM THE TRUCKING PERSPECTIVE THAT’S IMPORTANT TO US BECAUSE OUR PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS ON THE ROAD EVERY DAY COULD WEAVE A LOT MORE EXPOSURE. THOSE DRIVERS BE UNIQUE VANTAGE POINT TO SEE WHAT TAKES PLACE IN OTHER VEHICLES. YOUR HIGH APPEARED YOU CAN LOOK DOWN. YOU HAVE TO TELL YOU THE NEWS IS NOT GOOD. FAR TOO MANY DRIVERS ARE PREOCCUPIED WITH OPERATING THEIR PHONES WHICH SHIFTS THEM FROM THE DRIVING TASK TO THAT PHONE. WE BELIEVE THE RESTRICTIONS IN THIS LEGISLATION WILL ENHANCE SAFETY BY REDIRECTING THAT FOCUS BACK ON THE DRIVING TASK ITSELF. I THINK WHAT’S IMPORTANT TO NOTE TRUCKERS ALREADY ABIDE BY THE SPIRIT THIS IS IN AN EXPERIMENT. FEDERAL REGULATIONS PROHIBIT TRUCK DRIVERS FROM SPEAKING ON THE PHONE UNLESS IT IS IN A ONE TOUCH HANDS-FREE MODE. WHAT WE CAN SAY FROM A TRUCKING COMPANY’S PERSPECTIVE IT’S BEEN A VERY POSITIVE THING. IT ELICITS GOOD BEHAVIOR. IT GIVES TOOLS FOR FLEET MANAGER TO HELP DIRECT THEIR DRIVERS AND KEEPS PEOPLE FOCUS ON THE DR IVING TASK. MORE IMPORTANT; A LOT OF TRUCKING COMPANIES HAVE BASICALLY ZERO TOLERANCE APPROACH TO CELL PHONE USE. BE PROHIBITED ANY KIND WHILE MOVING BASED ON A TEXT MESSAGE THAT SAYS CALL US WHEN YOU GET BACK. OF COURSE THEY DON’T READ THE MESSAGES ON A DISPLAY IS PERMANENTLY MOUNTED OR EFFECTS. SO IT’S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THE>>REPRESENTATIVE BERNARDY: SUPPORTED THE BAN ON TEXTING BEFORE THAT BECAME BEFORE THE LEGISLATURE. FOR ALL THESE REASONS WE DO LOOK FORWARD TO PASSING HOUSE FILE 1180 AND REDUCING DISTRACTED DRIVING FOR ALL MINNESOTANS. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? REPRESENTATIVE CONSIDINE>>REPRESENTATIVE CONSIDINE: ACTUALLY I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. HANSEN. DOES THE TECHNOLOGY EXIST WE CAN MAKE THE CAR A DEAD ZONE WHILE IT IS IN OPERATION?>>TESTIFIER: I BELIEVE THAT TECHNOLOGY PROBABLY DOES EXIST. THE TECHNOLOGY EVEN EXIST FOR DRIVERS TO MAKE THAT INDIVIDUAL CHOICE BY USING A CELL PHONE FERRIDAY BACK WHERE YOU PLACE YOUR CELL PHONE IN IT AND IT WILL NOT WORK IT IS STILL IS ACCESSIBLE BUT IT CLOSES IT OFF FROM THE EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT THAT TALKS TO IT ALLOWS YOU TO COMMUNICATE WITH IT.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: I BELIEVE REPRESENTATIVE HOWE HAD A QUESTION FOR LISA COLLINS.>>REPRESENTATIVE HOWE: I GUESS I JUST WANT TO GO BACK TO TH IS HANDOUT AND WHERE IT SAYS ILLINOIS IT LOOKS LIKE IT INCREASED 4.4% FATALITY IS THERE A REASON WHY? WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF THAT? DO WE KNOW>>TESTIFIER: I DO NOT KNOW THAT ANSWER. I DO KNOW WITH THE ILLINOIS THEIR SECTOR TEXTING CITATIONS TO GO UP THE THAT YOU. I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER WHY THE FATALITIES INCREASE.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: I BELIEVE REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM YOUR OF OTHER TESTIFIERS?>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: YES. THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF VICTIMS I WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD. BRETT.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: IF YOU COULD PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.>>TESTIFIER: BRETT-I THINK IT WE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR GIVING THIS BILL THE OPPORTUNITY IT IS EARTH. IT WAS A LONG FIGHT THAT STARTED LAST YEAR FOR US AND SO WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD. I HAVE THE HONOR AND HEAVY BURDEN OF REPRESENTING THOSE WHO LOST A LOVED ONE TO A DISTRACTED DRIVER. THEN AGAIN; SO DO YOU. ON ON OCTOBER 28; 2015 MY DAD JOE–WAS KILLED WHILE WALKING ALONG THE ROAD TO GET HIS MORNING PAPER. THE IRONY OF THE TRAGEDIES THAT DAD DROVE SCHOOLBUS FOR NEARLY 50 YEARS KEEPING KIDS SAFE. THE DRIVER WAS TEXTING AND THE WITNESS SAID SHE NEVER APPLIED HER BREAKS AND THERE WERE NO SKID MARKS. UNFORTUNATELY; THIS IS AN INCREASINGLY COMMON THEME. THE DRIVER STATED BEFORE SHE HIT-SHE HAD A YELLOW CURB. THAT YELLOW BLUR WAS MY DAD. THIS IS HOW VISIBLE HE WOULD’VE BEEN. THIS IS THE JACKET OR STYLE JACKET HE WAS WEARING. BUT IF YOU’RE NOT LOOKING IT REALLY DOESN’T MATTER. MY LAST MEMORY OF MY DAD CAN’T BE OF HIS BODY LYING IN A DITCH ALONGSIDE THE FIELD HE FARMED HIS ENTIRE LIFE. MY FAMILY IS JOINT THE FIGHT TO MAKE OUR ROADS SAFER BECAUSE UNTIL IT HAPPENED TO US WE JUST THOUGHT A DISTRACTED DRIVER WAS A PROBLEM. NOW WE REALIZE IT’S A EPIDEMIC. THERE’S A NUMBER OF PEOPLE BEHIND ME WHO HAVE UNFORTUNATELY WORKED A LOT LONGER THAN WE HAVE ON THIS BILLS PASSAGE. MY SON AND DAUGHTER SPEAK AT DRIVERS ED CLASSES AN OFFER [INAUDIBLE] TO THOSE WHO SIGN A PLEDGE THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO USE THEIR CELL PHONE WHILE THEY DRIVE OTHERS SPEAK TO GROUPS ABOUT THEIR HORRIFIC CONSEQUENCES OF HANDHELD USE OF CELL PHONES WHILE DRIVING. WE CAN’T DO IT ALONE. WE ARE HEARING IN ST. PAUL TO PLEAD FOR YOUR HELP. LAST MAY THE STAR TRIBUNE POLL INDICATED NEARLY 80% OF MINNESOTANS BELIEVE IT SHOU LD BE ILLEGAL TO TALK ON THE PHONE WHILE DRIVING. THE SAME PERCENTAGE ROUGHLY BELIEVE THAT TEXTING OR USING SOCIAL MEDIA WHILE DRIVING SHOULD BE TREATED; EQUAL TO GO MORE SEVERELY THAN DRUNKEN-DRIVING NEARLY 80%; E VEN AS POLITICALLY DIVIDED AS WE HAVE BECOME THERE SEEMS TO BE ONE THING WE CAN AGREE ON. NO POLITICAL IT KEEPS YOU SAFE HONORABLE ROSE. DISTRACTED DRIVERS HAVE MANY FAITHS AND KILL REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS ALIKE. A LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT SAID; PEOPLE ARE NOT CLAIMING TO HEAR THIS BILL. THE STAR TRIBUNE POLL SUGGESTS THERE IS SUPPORT FOR LEGISLATION. WE ARE THE VOCAL MINORITY THE STAR TRIBUNE POLL REPRESENTS THE SILENT MAJORITY. I LOVE MY CIVIL LIBERTIES AS MUCH AS ANYBODY IN THIS ROOM. BUT THERE’S A BALANCE. IN MY CIVICS CLASS WE TALKED ABOUT THOMAS HOBBES AND JOHN LOCKE. HIS IDEAS ON CIVIL LIBERTIES INFLUENCE WRITERS OF THE CONSTITUTION. HOBBES SAYS WITHOUT GOVERNMENT WE LIVE IN A STATE OF NATURE. IN NATURE EACH PERSON DOES WHAT THEY WANT EVENTUALLY WE WILL HAVE A WAR OF ALL AGAINST ALL. TO AVOID THIS HOBBES AS WE ENTER INTO A SOCIAL CONTRACT. GIVING UP SOME RIGHTS FOR GOVERNMENT PROTECTION. JOHN LOCKE A STAUNCH ADVOCATE OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS IDENTIFIED THE INALIENABLE RIGHTS OF LIFE LIBERTY AND PROPERTY; HE CLAIMED MY RIGHT TO LIBERTY WHEN ANOTHER PERSON’S RIGHT TO LIBERTY INFRINGES UPON ANOTHER’S RIGHT TO LIFE GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO GET INVOLVED. MY DAD’S RIGHT TO LIFE WAS TAKEN AT THE HANDS OF THE DRIVER ABUSE HER RIGHT TO LIBERTY. YEARS AGO MY BIGGEST CONCERN WAS TO BE ON THE ROAD BETWEEN 11 O’CLOCK OR 2 PM ON THE SENATE TODAY WAS TO BE CONCERNED ABOUT ALL HOURS OF THE DAY BECAUSE OF DISTRACTED DRIVERS. IT’S A CRAP SHOOT. LOOK AT THE FACE OF THE DRIVER WHO PASTY. IF YOU ARE NOT SCARED YOU’RE NOT PAYING ATTENTION. THERE’S PROOF THAT HANDS-FREE LAWS SAVE LIVES. THE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY ADMINISTRATION SUGGEST STATISTICS SHOW A DROP IN FATALITIES IN THE STATE THAT IMPLEMENT IT HANDHELD BANDS. REPRESENTATIVE HOWE; I BELIEVE; CORRECT HIM THAT STUDY YOU ARE LOOKING AT THERE WERE 14 ENTITIES POLITICAL ENTITIES REPORTING [INAUDIBLE] WASHINGTON DC IS NOT A STATEMENT OF THE 14 DATA REPORTING 13 OF THOSE INDICATE A DROP IN FATALITIES. JOHN>>REPRESENTATIVE MENTIONED THE TRUCKERS ASSOCIATION WHICH THEIR LAW WAS PASSED BASED ON INFORMATION FROM THE FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION. THAT IS GREAT. WE’VE A LAW FOR OUR TRUCK DRIVERS THAT I CAN TELL YOU [INAUDIBLE] CAN DO THE SAME THING. AFTER OUR YOUNGEST SON PAST HIS PERMIT TEST WERE GIVEN A BOOKLET FOR THE PARENTS TITLED THE PARENTS OF TEEN DRIVERS. I WAS MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY. A PORTION OF THE BOOK IS THIS DEVOTED TO DISTRACTED DRIVING AND CITES A STUDY DONE AT THE VIRGINIA TECH TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE. I’M ASSUMING OUR LEGISLATORS SUPPORT THE CONTENTS OF THIS PAMPHLET IF IT’S HANDED OUT AT EVERY LICENSING STATION MINNESOTA. SO I CALL VIRGINIA TECH AND WAS ABLE TO SPEAK WITH THE LEAD RESEARCHER DR. CHARLIE COWARD WHO LEAVING MINNESOTA WOULD SUPPORT WHAT VIRGINIA TECH HAS TO SAY. SHE STATED; VIRGINIA TECH’S RESEARCH UNEQUIVOCALLY SUPPORTS A HANDHELD BAN LEGISLATION. WE FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT HANDS-FREE DEVICE USE DOES NOT INCREASE RISK TO THE SAME DEGREE AS PHYSICALLY MANIPULATING THE PHONE TWO HANDS ON THE WHEEL ARE SAFER THAN ONE. I’VE HEARD REQUIRED HANDS DISCRIMINATORY AGAINST THOSE WHO CAN AFFORD BLUETOOTH. EVERYONE BEHIND ME WOULD HAVE ONE MORE ARGUMENT TO THAT. HOW ABOUT A FUNERAL EXPENSE OF $7000 BE PLACED ON YOU IMMEDIATELY WITH NO WARNING AND NO BUDGETING. HISTORICALLY MINNESOTA HAS BEEN SLOW TO PASS LEGISLATION AFFECTING SAFETY ON AROSE. WE WERE AMONG THE LAST DATES TO FEBRUARY 2 .08 AND LAID RAISE THE LEGAL MINIMUM DRINKING AGE TO 20 IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE THAT WAY WITH HANDS-FREE. AS WE WATCH OREGON AND WASHINGTON PASS HANDHELD BANDS 2017 MINNESOTA BURIED ANOTHER 60 VICTIMS TO DISTRACTED DRIVING. HAD THIS BILL PASSED A YEAR AGO IT VERY LIKELY ROBERT -THE MOST RECENT VICTIM OF OUR NEGLIGENT LAW WOULD BE ALIVE TODAY. WE ARE ALL FAMILIAR WITH HIS STORY. ANOTHER MEMBER OF OUR SMALL COMMUNITY OF NEW CRAIG FEBRUARY LOST HIS LIFE ON HIS 56 FOR WHILE BIKING 56 MILES. I CANNOT SLEEP AT NIGHT KNOWING MY COMMITTEE COULD’VE MADE A DIFFERENCE. WHILE IT’S TOO LATE TO SAVE MY DAD AND THOSE WHO ARE AMONG US IT’S NOT TOO LATE TO SAVE OURSELVES. AMONG THE PORTRAITS WE HAVE IN YOUR BECAUSE WE DON’T KNOW WHO WILL BE THE NEXT VICTIM OF DISTRACTED DRIVING. BEFORE WE BURY ANOTHER IN A CERTAIN IT’S VERY THIS ANTIQUATED LAW. BEFORE WE BURY ANOTHER MINNESOTAN WITH BURY THE POLITICAL HATCHET THAT’S DIVIDING THE PASSAGE OF THIS BILL. BEFORE WE SEND OUR ONE MORE DEATH AND FUNERAL NOTICE THAT SENT OUT A BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENT OF A NEW LAW THAT’S GOING TO SAVE LIVES. YOU HOLD THE KEY TO SAVING LIVES. PLEASE; PASS THE HANDS-FREE BILL.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE>>REPRESENTATIVE NEWBERGER: THEM OUR FAMILY WAS ABLE TO MAKE IT BECAUSE OF PRIOR COMMITMENTS BUT I’VE REPRESENTATIVE JIM NEWBERGER WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THE SCENE OF THAT ACCIDENT.>>REPRESENTATIVE NEWBERGER: MR. CHAIR YOU WANT ME TO COME DOWN->>CHAIR JOHNSON: RIGHT THERE>>REPRESENTATIVE NEWBERGER: THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY . IT’S AN IMPORTANT TOPIC THAT WE TALK ABOUT IT IT’S VERY DIFFICULT TOPIC FOR ME. I’M GOING TO ENDEAVOR TO KEEP MYSELF TOGETHER HERE. A FEW SUMMERS BACK I WAS DRIVING DOWN HIGHWAY 10 AND I WAS ONE OF THE VERY FIRST VEHICLES WHEN A CRASH THAT HAPPENED RIGHT IN MY DISTRICT; FIVE MINUTES FOR MY HOME. YOU’VE ALL HEARD ME SAY 1000 TIMES BEEN A PARAMEDIC FOR 30 YEARS VERY WORD TO THIS; THING. WHAT ARE VEHICLE CRASHES IS WHAT I DO FOR A LIVING. DRIVING-I CAME ACROSS THIS CRASH WE WERE LIKE I SAID WHEN THE FIRST ONES ON THE SCENE. WHAT HAPPENED WAS AT HIGHWAY 10 WHICH IS ABOUT A 65 MILE AN HOUR ZONE GOING FROM ST. CLOUD DOWN TO TH E METRO COUNTY ROAD 11 CUTS ACROSS HIGHWAY 10 AND THERE’S A LIGHT DIFFERENT THERE’S AN INTERSECTION THAT’S CONTROLLED INTERSECTION. THE LIGHT WAS GREEN FOR THE PEOPLE ON THE COUNTY ROAD AND THE MOTHER FAMILY WERE IN THE MINIVAN; THEY WERE QUEUED UP TO GO TO TURN TO GET ONTO THE HIGH WAY 10. FIRST CAR WENT. THEY HAD THE GREEN LIGHT. THEY WERE FUN TO SECOND CAR WENT THEY WENT. THEY WERE FINE. LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE THEY JUST FOLLOW THE CAR IN FRONT OF YOU BECAUSE THE LIGHT IS GREEN THEY PULLED OUT ONTO HIGHWAY 10 AND I GOT BROADSIDED BY ANOTHER DRIVER ON HIGHWAY 10 WAS DOING IN EXCESS OF 65 MILES AN HOUR.. THIS INDIVIDUAL WAS ON FACEBOOK AT THE TIME IT WAS TOO BUSY DOING REPLY ON FACEBOOK. THAT VAN WAS SPLIT IN HALF THE FATHER WAS KILLED AT THE SCENE HE WAS DEAD RIGHT THERE. THE YOUNG DAUGHTER;; THEY TRY TO-SHE STILL HAD SOME VITAL SIGNS. THEY WERE VERY HARD TO STABILIZE HER AS MUCH THEY COULD THEY FLEW HER OUT-TO MY REGULAR PARAMEDIC PARTNERS ARE ON THE CALL. TO THIS DAY THEY WERE VERY DIFFICULT I’M TALKING ABOUT IT. SUFFICE TO SAY; I DO FRONT ROW SEAT FOR THAT ONE. I’VE HAD FOUR OTHER FATALITIES IN MY DISTRICT THAT HAVE BEEN DIRECTLY RELATED TO DISTRACTED DRIVING. I’M VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL ON THIS . I’ M THE THIRD AUTHOR ON THIS. I COULD SIT HERE ALL DAY UNTIL YOU STORY AFTER’S STORY AIRCRAFT AFTER CRASH TH IS TIME THIS BILL TO BECOME LAW AND I’M A VERY CONSERVATIVE PERSON MOST OF MY FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE WOULD PROBABLY HAVE OTHER WORDS FOR THAT BUT AT THE POINT I’M TRYING TO MAKE YOUR IS THIS. LIFE IS A RIGHT . DRIVING IS A PRIVILEGE. ALL WE ARE DOING WITH THIS BILL IS MAKING A PRIVILEGE SAFER TO PROTECT A RIGHT I SUPPORT THIS BILL PLEASE; VOTE YES.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: REPRESENTATIVE DEHN>>REPRESENTATIVE DEHN: THANK YOU REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM I SIGNED ON TO THIS BILL. I THINK IT IS DEFINITELY TIME. CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN DONE THAT EVEN HANDS-FREE IS A BIT OF DISTRACTION FOR DRIVERS? I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN SOME STUDIES THAT SAY THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BEING IN A CAR HANDS-FREE SPEAKING ON A PHONE IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN BEING IN A CAR WITH A PASSENGER AND HAVING A CONVERSATION. DID YOU CONSIDER-I’M IN A SAFE GOING FURTHER WITH THIS BILL WERE IS THIS WHAT YOU FELT THE APPETITE OF THE LEGISLATURE THE PEOPLE OF MINNESOTA WOULD BE AMENABLE TO?>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: THERE ARE LOTS OF DISTRACTIONS EATING A HAMBURGER; MENTIONED SOME OF THESE OTHER ONES. I THINK THE GREATEST DISTRACTION THAT MY LOCAL POLICE DEPARTMENT CAME ACROSS WAS A GUY THAT WAS ACTUALLY HAD AN ELECTRONIC WALK AND WAS GROWING IN HIS CAR. BUT; NONETHELESS; I THINK WE HAVE TO BE REALISTIC ABOUT THINGS AND HANDS-FREE IS PROVEN TO BE A VERY VERY GOOD TOOL TO REDUCE A LOT OF INJURIES AND DEATHS AROUND THE COUNTRY. DO I -WOULD I LIKE IT IF NOBODY TALKED ON THE PHONE IN THE ENTIRE STATE OF MINNESOTA YOU ARE DRIVING? YES. I WOULD LIKE THAT I GUESS REALLY FROM A REALISTIC STANDPOINT THAT’S NOT THE CASE AND I CHOSE TO MAKE THIS BILL SIMILAR TO THE OTHER STATES THAT ARE DOING IT BECAUSE IT WORKS IN A MORE REALIST AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE TIMES THAT YOU NEED TO TALK ON YOUR PHONE MY SON IS A SALESMAN HE MAKES HIS LIVING SELLING THINGS AND YES; HE TALKED ON THE PHONE BUT HE DOES IT AND HANDS-FREE MANNER. EVERYBODY IN HIS COMPANY WHICH IS A MAJOR US CHEMICAL COMPANY AS THE SAME RULES AND I MIGHT ADD THAT THE LARGEST PRIVATELY INDEPENDENT HELD CORPORATION IN THE WORLD; CARGILL; MAYBE MANY OF YOU ARE THAT SUMMER; THEY DO THE SAME THING AND THEY FOUND OUT THAT IT REDUCES THEIR INSURANCE RATES OF COURSE BUT IT REDUCES THEIR CASUALTIES WORLDWIDE.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: ANYBODY ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO TESTIFY? WITH THAT REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM JEWISH OR RENEW YOUR MOTION>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM: YES MR. CHAIR I LIKE TO RENEW MY MOTION FOR HOUSE FILE 1182 GO TO WAYS AND MEANS. I’VE JUST A COUPLE OF CLOSING COMMENTS.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: GO AHEAD>>REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM : MEMBERS; THERE’S NOT A LOT OF TIMES WHEN WE HAVE A BILL THAT COULD MAKE SUCH A DIFFERENCE FOR SO MANY PEOPLE HERE IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. A LOT OF TIMES WE GO TO OUR COMMITTEE MEANS AND WE GO TO THE FLOOR WE HAVE BOTH SIDES GOING AGAINST ONE ANOTHER. A LITTLE BIT OF ACRIMONY. THAT’S POLITICS; I GUESS BUT THIS BILL CAN BRING US ALL TOGETHER AND MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE. I THINK IT IS INDISPUTABLE WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD. I HOPE THAT THE OTHER BODY; WHATEVER IT’S CALLED; THE OTHER BODY WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS; TOO BECAUSE; WE OWE IT TO ALL OF OUR ADVOCATES; ALL OF OUR GOOD PEOPLE THAT BEEN TOUCHED BY THIS-AND I CAN TELL YOU WE HAVE TO DO IT. THANK YOU.>>CHAIR JOHNSON: WITH THAT REPRESENTATIVE UGLEM WHEN HE WAS HIS MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY; AYE. [CHORUS OF AYES.] OPPOSED; NAY.>>[GAVEL]>>CHAIR JOHNSON: THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY THAT CAME HERE TODAY AND WE WILL BE ADJOURNED UNTIL TOMORROW AT 10:15 AM.>>[GAVEL]>>[ADJOURNMENT]>>

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *